Monday, January 10, 2011


Is this convicted cocaine trafficker in prison? Or not?

BC Mary comment:  This post begins with the Anonymous comment which arrived here yesterday, January 9, 2011 which I published without comment:

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "BC Rail: Can we handle the truth?":

Bains was paroled with in months of receiving his 9 year sentence. 

Shocked, I asked around. One private response was "that a 9 year sentence would enable parole after 3 years, surmising that If Bains had spent 18 months in custody awaiting trial, he would get double credit for that ... so not impossible that he was released on parole immediately after trial".

Then, the Invaluable "E.M." came up with the following ... and the eye-popping revelation from BC Supreme Court archives:

E.M has left a new comment on your post "BC Rail: Can we handle the truth?":

I do not believe Bains was paroled, if so Why did He go to Court to appeal on January 19th 2010, which the Judgement was given April 9, 2010.

"5] The trial judge dismissed both applications. See R. v. Bains (11 April 2008), Victoria 127870 (B.C. Prov. Ct.) [s. 11(b) ruling] and R. v. Bains (11 April 2008), 127870C (B.C. Prov. Ct.) [s. 7 ruling]. In regard to the second ruling, the trial judge declined to hold a voir dire or to receive in camera submissions for a voir dire.

[6] Mr. Bains appeals his conviction on two grounds: ...

[7] For the reasons that follow, I am of the view the trial judge did not err in dismissing either application. Accordingly, I would dismiss the appeal. "

Click HERE for the Reasons for Judgment, touching on the famous Bains-Basi wire-taps, and much more.

Mary says: A major tip o'the tuque to "E.M." for relentless digging into the court's archives, and generous sharing. Thanks immensely.

And before any astute readers ask "Is Jas Bains, the convicted cocaine trafficker, in prison or walking free?" ... the fact is, I don't know.  As readers will see from E.M.'s findings, Jas was charged with serious cocaine trafficking between Vancouver Island and Toronto. Seems to me that society's interest in such matters would require that kind of information to be spelled out very clearly.


Let me count the ways, oops... Let me count the months for Regina vs. Bains

"An estimated four-month trial was scheduled to commence in April 2006 with the hearing of the voir dires. The balance of the trial was scheduled to continue in September through to November 2006."

.... April, May, June, July ---- September, October, November

Seven months!

Then there was the Basi/Virk/Basi trial, started in late April with many ensuing delays and finally scrubbed based on cost of trial in mid October by two government deputy ministers.

Bains got 9 years, plus another 3 years if he doesn't pay his fine.

Basi (/Virk) got 2 years less a day and paid the fines.

Why go the full nine yards on a Cocaine trial and yet pull the carpet on the Breach of Trust charges for BC Rail?
Gee whiz Mary. The page can't be found. Re: The reasons for judgement regarding: The Basi/Bains wire-taps. Am I smelling, more dirty Liberal tactics?

Dang! It certainly was available earlier this morning! I read the whole thing.
First, the comment about parole eligibility after three years is only part of the story. A prisoner is normally able to seek temporary absence after one-sixth of the sentence; 18 months in Bain's case.

He could still appeal because, if one is not devoid of cash, an appeal carries a chance of removing the conviction and thus, the parole conditions. Also, if he escaped conviction now, perhaps he could face the next trial as a person with a "clean record" never before convicted.

One more example of how the justice industry favors those with money.
Cut an paste worked for me when the link didn't
10:23 thanks ... I got the "Page can't be found" message too.


After your welcome tip, I went back and re-posted the original link ... darned if it didn't work just fine.

Curious, I compared the original ("can't be found") link with the link as re-posted here on the blog. Identical. In every way, identical.

Beats me, what goes on. But I urge people to print some of these documents for safekeeping.

Next thing we must watch for: what the heck is going on in BC Supreme Court today at 2:00 PM. Rumour has it that it's more than Aneal Basi, showing up.

Gee. Maybe Big Media will be there, diligently working on our behalf!
"Rumour has it that it's more than Aneal Basi, showing up."

When I went there this morning (looking for the Sinixt action on the docket somewhere/anywhere, with no success) there was more than Aneal on the list. I posted an image (.pdf is an image format) of the entry at the House this morning which shows three different individuals answering to six charges (Mr. Aneal Basi, Mr. "Limited Access, and Bobby Virk each answering to accepting a bribe and breach of trust - what it is really all about, who knows? Although "clever" Johnny come lately to the BC Rail deal assures us he knows all......(though as far as I know he has attended as many hearings as myself, NONE, but then little birdies drop stuff into his lap - apparently.

We all deserve to know what is going on in our so-called justice system, without having to have our own friendly birdies (except in domestic or sexual abuse cases where privacy is an issue), after all the system is supposed to serve US and after all we PAY for it's mediocre operation.
As I've pointed out before I can find out what happened in a courtroom somewhere in California, Oregon or other states yesterday or two years ago with greater ease than I can in the system I'm accountable to and actually paying for!

It's fortunate I don't live in Vancouver, as I would probably have blown up the building at Smythe and Robson by now, and it is really a lovely building!
Post a Comment

<< Home